MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792161694 · doi:10.1017/s1551929500053256

Precision and Detection Limits for EDS Analysis in the SEM

2003· article· en· W2792161694 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Lifshin, Raynald Gauvin

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy Today · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroanalysisSample (material)StatisticsSample size determinationMathematicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Microanalysis using an EDS on an SEM are sometimes asked whether two samples are of different composition, or if different regions in the same sample vary in composition, A best educated guess may be that differences of a few percent can be distinguished under optimized conditions that include favorable data collection times and count rates, stable instrument operation, and well prepared samples and standards that remain free of contamination. Another frequently asked question is whether it is possible to detect a given amount of a particular element in a sample.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroscopy TodaySame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207